I welcome everyone! This article focuses on the most hot topic- social inequality in modern Russia... Who among us has not thought why some people are rich and others are poor; Why do some interrupt from water to compote, while others go to Bentleys and do not care about anything? I am sure that this topic worried you, dear reader! It doesn't matter how old you are. There is always a peer who is luckier, happier, richer, better dressed…. etc. What is the reason? What is the scale of social inequality in modern Russia? Read on and find out.

Social inequality concept

Social inequality- This is unequal access of people to social, economic and other benefits. By good we mean that (things, services, etc.) that a person considers useful for himself (purely economic definition). You should understand that this concept is closely related to the term that we wrote about earlier.

Society is designed so that people have unequal access to benefits. The reasons for this state of affairs are varied. One of them is the limited resources for the production of goods. There are over 6 billion people on Earth today, and everyone wants to eat well and sleep well. And food, land, in the end, extremely becomes less and less.

It is clear that the geographical factor also plays a role. In Russia, with all its territory, there are only 140 million people, and the population is rapidly declining. But for example, in Japan - 120 million - that's on four islands. With the wildly limited resources, the Japanese live well: they build artificial land. China, with a population of over a billion people, is also, in principle, living well. Such examples seem to refute the thesis that what more people, the less benefits and inequality should be greater.

In fact, many other factors also affect it: the culture of a given society, work ethic, Social responsibility states, industrial development, development of monetary relations and financial institutions, etc.

Moreover, social inequality is strongly influenced by natural inequality. For example, a person was born without legs. Or lost his legs and arms. For example, how this individual:

Of course, he lives abroad - and in principle, I think he lives well. But in Russia, I think he would not have survived. We have people with arms and legs die of hunger, and social services no one is needed at all. So the social responsibility of the state is extremely important in smoothing out inequality.

Very often in my studies I heard from people that if they get sick more or less seriously, then the company in which they work invites them to quit. And they can't do anything. They don't even know how to protect their rights. And if they knew, then these companies would “hit” a decent amount and the next time they would think a hundred times whether it is worth doing this with their employees. That is, legal illiteracy of the population can be a factor of social inequality.

It is important to understand that when studying this phenomenon, sociologists use the so-called multidimensional models: they evaluate people according to several criteria. These include: income, education, power, prestige, etc.

Thus, this concept covers many different aspects. And if you are writing a social science essay on this topic, then reveal these aspects!

Social inequality in Russia

Our country is one of those in which social inequalities are manifested to the highest degree. There is a very big difference between rich and poor. For example, when I was still a volunteer, a volunteer from Germany came to Perm. Who does not know, in Germany, instead of serving in the army, you can volunteer for a year in any country. So, they put him in a family for a year. A day later, the German volunteer left there. Because, according to him, even by the standards of Germany it is a luxurious life: a luxurious apartment, etc. He cannot live in such luxurious conditions when he sees homeless people and beggars begging on the streets of the city.

Plus, in our country, social inequality manifests itself in an extremely large form in relation to different professions... A school teacher receives 25,000 rubles for one and a half rates, God forbid, and some painter can receive all 60,000 rubles, a crane operator's salary starts from 80,000 rubles, a gas welder - from 50,000 rubles.

Most scientists see the reason for this social inequality in the fact that there is a transformation in our country social system... It broke down in 1991, overnight, along with the state. A new one has not been built. That is why we are dealing with such social inequality.

You can find other examples of social inequality and. And for today, everything is up to new publications! Don't forget to like it!

Best regards, Andrey Puchkov

Social inequality- a specific form of social differentiation in which certain individuals, social groups, layers, classes are at different levels of the vertical social hierarchy, have unequal life chances and opportunities to meet needs.

Inequality is understood as unequal access of large social groups of people (strata, strata, estates, castes, classes) to economic resources, social benefits and political power. Inequality exists in all societies. To measure inequality, two indicators are used - wealth (stock of assets) and income (cash flow per unit of time).

Social inequality is the result of unequal distribution of economic benefits. In 1972, in England, the richest and wealthiest 20% of the British owned 82% of the wealth, and the remaining 80% accounted for 18%. Over time, this trend has changed little, since the economic structure of society has not changed. Cross-country analysis, expressed in decile coefficients, showed that in modern Russia the level of inequality is at the level of 12-13 (in the USSR it did not exceed 5, in Sweden - 6). This clearly demonstrates the widening gap between the thin layer of the rich and the impoverished majority of society.

Sociologists have proven that different groups population have unequal life chances. They buy different quantities and qualities of food, clothing, housing, etc. People having more money, eat better, live in more comfortable homes, prefer a private car public transport, can afford expensive vacations, etc. But apart from obvious economic advantages, the well-to-do strata have hidden privileges. The poor have shorter lives (even if they enjoy all the benefits of medicine), less educated children (even if they go to the same public schools), etc.

However, social inequality can be expressed in terms of not only class, but gender and racial. With equal incomes, children of black and colored parents may have worse life chances than children of whites.

If a society restricts access to a prestigious education or quality medical care just because a person has no or very little money, then this order of things is regarded as social injustice. As a rule, the three concepts - inequality, equality and justice - are analyzed in close connection with each other. Young revolutionaries in 1917 wanted to establish social justice on one-sixth of the land, for which they sought to eliminate social inequality and make all people equal. But it turned out that achieving the ideal is not easy at all. If two people make different labor contributions to the prosperity of society, then their equal income will be assessed by one of them as an unfair assessment of his merits. Socialism has never been able to establish a just society that suits all strata of the population. The ruling class had more benefits and better life chances. It was the social injustice and social inequality hidden within him that ruined this social system, which was beautiful in its idea.

Equality has three meanings:

1. equality before the law, legal (formal) equality - is expressed in the equality of all citizens before the law (this is a relatively new understanding of equality that appeared in Western Europe in the 17th-18th centuries);
2. equality of opportunity - everyone has the same chances to achieve everything in life that they deserve thanks to their merits and abilities (this is related to the problem social mobility, unfulfilled desires, unsuccessful set of circumstances that prevented fulfillment, underestimation of merits and non-recognition, unequal start in life);
3. equality of results - everyone should have the same starting opportunities regardless of talent, effort and ability (the ideal embodiment of such equality is socialism).

The three concepts of equality are not entirely compatible. F. Hayek believed that the combination of equality of opportunity and equality of results destroys equality before the law. This happens because in order to achieve equality of results, one has to violate the principle of equality of all before the law and apply different rules in relation to ordinary people and those in power. Violations of equality before the law are not necessarily malicious intent. For example, pensioners, people with disabilities and women have unequal opportunities and abilities to work, if they are not given privileges, their standard of living will drop sharply. F. Hayek believed: inequality is a necessary payment for material well-being in a market society.

All societies, with the exception of the simplest hunter and gatherer, are characterized by all three types of inequality identified by M. Weber in the understanding of power: inequality of remuneration, inequality, inequality of access to political power.

The most common and easiest way to measure inequality is to compare the lowest and highest incomes in a given country. P. Sorokin thus compared different countries and different historical eras. For example, in medieval Germany the ratio of the highest to the lowest income was 10,000: 1, and in medieval England it was 600: 1.

In terms of the level of inequality and poverty (the second is a consequence of the first), individuals, peoples, countries, epochs can be compared with each other. Cross-historical and cross-cultural analyzes are widely used in macrosociology. They reveal new aspects of the development of human society.

According to the hypothesis of Gerhard Lenski (1970), the degree of inequality in different historical periods is different. The era of slavery and feudalism was characterized by deep inequality.

G. Lenski explains the lesser degree of inequality in industrial society with a lower concentration of power among managers, the presence of democratic governments, the struggle for influence between trade unions and entrepreneurs. high level social mobility and a developed system social security, which raises the standard of living of the poor to certain, quite acceptable standards. K. Marx and P. Sorokin expressed different points of view on the dynamics of inequality.

According to Marx, minimal inequality or its complete absence was observed in the primitive communal system. Inequality appeared and began to deepen in antagonistic formations (slavery and feudalism), reached its maximum during the period of classical capitalism and will grow rapidly as this formation develops. Marx's theory can be called an "escalation of inequality." His theory of the absolute and relative impoverishment of the proletariat states that "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer."

In contrast to Karl Marx, P. Sorokin argued that there is no permanent increase or decrease in inequality in the history of mankind. In different eras and in different countries, inequality increases and decreases, i.e. fluctuates (fluctuates).

Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore were the first to advocate social inequality as a necessary element of stratification that performs positive functions. By stratification, they understood the uneven distribution of material wealth, power functions and social prestige depending on the functional importance (significance) of the position. The importance of a position is determined by its assessment, firstly, by the personality as an object of social action, and secondly, by the society itself. According to K. Davis and W. Moore, "every society, regardless of whether it is simple or complex, must differentiate people in terms of prestige and respect, and must have a certain degree of institutionalized inequality." Social inequality is a naturally evolving mechanism, thanks to which society provides the most qualified persons for promotion to the most important positions.

However, it is very difficult to determine exactly which positions are most important for society. In different societies, the same positions in stratification can be assessed in different ways, but in any society there are positions that require specific abilities and training that are functionally more important than other positions. Let's say the position of a company manager is functionally more important than the position of a loader. Both positions are required by the company, but the managerial position requires specific skills and training.

According to Davis and Moore, functionally important positions should be rewarded appropriately. In this case, the society will be able to ensure the promotion of qualified people to the most important positions. The reward must be attractive in order to persuade people to fulfill the responsibilities associated with these positions.

The most valuable positions are considered to be those that require: a) unique (rare) natural talent and / or b) very extensive training and education. Both qualities are extremely rare among the population.

Thus, social inequality fulfills a number of very important functions. On the contrary, universal equality deprives people of the incentive to advance, the desire to exert maximum effort and ability to fulfill their responsibilities (they will assume that they receive no more for their work than they would get if they did nothing all day).

The functional theory of inequality by W. Moore and K. Davis formed the basis for the theory of social stratification and managerial hierarchy they created.

The functional theory of stratification comes from:

1. the principle of equal opportunities;
2. the principle of survival of the fittest;
3. psychological determinism, according to which success in work is predetermined by individual psychological qualities - motivation, need for achievement, intelligence, etc.
4. the principles of work ethics, according to which success in work is a sign of God's mercy, failure is the result of only a lack of good qualities, etc.

According to the functional theory of stratification, the highest management posts in society should be occupied by the most capable and qualified people. The higher the place in the hierarchy, the more capable and qualified a person should be.

The higher the place in the hierarchy, the higher the quality of the accepted management decisions... The higher the quality of the decision made, the higher the responsibility should be. The higher the responsibility for the decision, the more power to carry out this decision must have this person.

The higher the quality and responsibility for the decision made, the more stringent the selection of candidates should be. The most rigid filter barriers should be on the upper steps of the pyramid.

Economic resources in modern society are not equally distributed and people are aware of this. Thus, the income gap in the United States is 10 times greater than in Sweden. The rich in any society have wealth that is hundreds and thousands of times greater than the incomes of the lower class.

Although inequality creates large masses of discontent and weakens the social cohesion of the nation, modern society remains remarkably stable. Sociologists explain the mystery of the stability of social stratification based on inequality by the functional usefulness of the pyramidal structure of society, which makes it possible to evaluate and reward individual contributions in proportion to the merit of an individual and to promote the most deserving individuals to the top.

The theory of W. Moore and K. Davis is aimed at explaining the positive and negative consequences of inequality. Among the negative consequences is social resentment against inequality, which sometimes escalates into open conflict. The elite and groups of the richest, seeking to preserve their privileges and preferential position in society, block the advancement of talented and enterprising representatives of the lower classes to the top. Inequality feeds on the passivity of the lower classes, resigned to their fate and fatalistically believing that under the existing system of government they will never have a chance to advance and actively participate in the political life of the country.

Abdulina A.

Abdulina A.

The problem of social inequality in the history of European philosophy

Abdulina A.

Scientific adviser: Ph.D., Associate Professor Medvedeva E.N ..

State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education Saratov State Medical University named after IN AND. Razumovsky Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation

Department of Philosophy, humanities and psychology

The problem of social inequality in the history of European philosophy

Abdulina A.

Scientific adviser: Ph.D., Associate Professor Medvedeva E.N ..

State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education Saratov State Medical University named after IN AND. Razumovsky Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation

Department of Philosophy, Humanities and Psychology

A superficial look at the people around them already gives reason to talk about their dissimilarity and individuality. People differ in gender, temperament, hair and eye color, age, intelligence level, and many other characteristics. Nature has endowed each of us with unique talents and abilities. One can play the violin, another can lift unbearable weights, the third has excellent logic and thinking, and someone has become a weak and disabled person. Differences between people that are due to their mental and physiological characteristics are called natural.

The differences in this category are not harmless. They sometimes cause unequal relationships among individuals. Inequality that arises from natural differences is the first form of inequality. It manifests itself not only in humans, but also in animals. Some researchers believe that social inequality is a mythological construct modern society.

Since we are talking about human society, the main thing here is that social inequality is inseparable from other concepts, such as social differences and social differentiation.

Social differences are those characteristics that were previously generated social factors:

· Way of life;

· Division of labor;

· Social roles and the like.

Everything that leads to differences to one degree or another is related to property, income level, power, education and achievement of social status.

Any organized social institution strives to maintain inequality. Indeed, in this, many see the ordering principle, without which it is inconceivable social connections and integration into society of something new.

Inequality exists in any society between people. This is a natural and logical process. In every society there are people who differ in their abilities and interests, in their financial capabilities and the availability of education. That is why the problem of the origin of social inequality, its structure and relations between individuals aroused such great interest among thinkers and politicians and even ordinary people who view social inequality as the peak of injustice.

The history of social thought has often explained the inequality of people with different points vision: the initial inequality of souls, the imperfection of human nature, divine providence and others.

The historical course of the development of all sociology, as well as the course of the history of one of its disciplines - social inequality, already has more than one century. At the same time, long before the 19th century, scientists and philosophers pondered the nature of relations between people, the problem of justice and injustice of inequality, the fate of the majority, and so on.

The first scientist to put forward his vision of social inequality was the ancient Greek philosopher Plato. In his work "The State" Plato clearly outlined the idea of ​​how he understands the existence of inequality in society during his lifetime. So, the main idea is this work was that, according to the philosopher, the state is two unequal formations. One of them is the poor, the other is the rich. But even though these two groups are so different, they live together, and always in enmity with each other. Both formations are haunted by insecurity and fear.

Plato believed that a correct state is scientifically substantiated and therefore it is possible to create a society within it that will take the principles of justice as the basis of its life, ensure social stability and internal discipline.

Plato divided all citizens into three unequal classes:

· The rulers are philosophers. They run the state, develop new ways of developing society.

· Warriors are protectors. The main goal of these strata of society is to protect the state from enemies (internal or external).

· Officials are employees. They are engaged in agriculture, handicrafts. It is in these layers that doctors, actors and so on work. They provide financial support to the state, since their main goal is the extraction of resources for life support.

Having developed a detailed theory of the social and personal education of warriors and philosophers, Plato in no way referred it to the so-called workers. Plato was convinced that private property must be abolished, thereby eliminating inequality.

Plato believed that the basis of the class division of society was a functional principle. Plato put forward the idea that a highly stratified society is characterized by the following parameters: features ruling class there is equality of chances or opportunities, there is no private property and the entire population is focused on the general welfare. But Plato's idea was not the only one in the era of Antiquity.

The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle also dealt with the issue of social inequality. About his reflections on this topic, he narrates in the work "Politics". It was here that he identified three class elements that make up the state structure:

• very rich class;

• very poor class;

· middle class.

It was the middle class that Aristotle singled out as the best. Why? Because, in his opinion, representatives of this class, according to the conditions of their life, are more prepared to follow rational principle... In the future, out of the polar unequal poor will grow into avid criminals, and out of the polar rich - crooks.

At the same time, the middle class was the best from the point of view of the state. It is more numerous and strong enough to "tip the scales in the right direction." The middle class is stable and well managed.

However, Aristotle urged all strata to think about the poor, since it is this class that is the “enemy” of the state. Where there are more poor people, the state will always have enemies in any internal and external affairs. It is poverty that creates chaos in the state and is the beginning of all complications. A state that does not fight poverty becomes unstable and is simply doomed to ruin and devastation. Aristotle was opposed to inequality in society. He was negatively disposed towards both the poor, who were deprived of their rights and their own property, and towards the rich. He represented the ideal form of government in those models where the selfish use of power is completely absent. By itself, power served the whole of society, and therefore Aristotle ranked among the capable citizens only from the middle class - "polity".

Putting forward one idea after another, Aristotle believed that society and the state should strive for the equalization of property, and not for complete equality. That is why Aristotle grabbed the middle class so hard. This is a strong group, and it can definitely become dominant. In states where some have a lot of funds and resources, while others have nothing, neither property, nor money, two types of political regime appear:

1. "Oligarchy" - in this regime, everything is carried out only in the interests of wealthy citizens.

2. "Democracy" - this regime presupposes actions in the interests of the urban poor.

Regardless of what regime is in the state, it reaches its extreme, this leads to "tyranny".

These are the views of the ancient Greek philosophers, which are still relevant to this day, for example, in sociology.

If we are talking about representatives of the Renaissance, who decided to express their opinion on social inequality, then the dominant position is occupied by the views of the Italian thinker N. Machiavelli. One of his most famous works, which underlie the conduct of politics, is the essay "The Sovereign".

Machiavelli observed that the negative attitude, high nervousness and tension between the elite stratum of society and the people is the result that unites both categories and this is a fear of each other.

Machiavelli was always on the side of the middle and upper strata of the Italian city. Since they represented a confident and cohesive force, ready for change and work for the sake of society, and not for personal income.

The English materialist philosopher T. Hobbes has always emphasized equality, that all people are equal, and the first thing to do to unite the state and its development is to replace inequality in power and privileges. That is, people strive for power only because it gives them privileges, and since a person is an insatiable creature in his desires, such a system is harmful to the state.

T. Hobbes considers the state as a result of the concluded social contract between people. This "contract" represents the transfer of the rights of government from one person to another. That is, citizens voluntarily relinquish power, thereby limiting their rights and freedoms in favor of the state, whose goal is only one: to ensure peace and security on the territory of their country. T. Hobbes believes that the chosen ruler rules, but is guided only by laws and with the full consent of his subordinates and subjects. The role of the state according to T. Hobbes is exalted. The philosopher considers him an absolute sovereign. If such a state exists, then in its "ideal society" there will be no privileged classes, since they are not allowed and are the first impetus to the disintegration of equality of rights.

This theory has long had supporters, and today finds authority among citizens, but it is worth noting that these were not the only views of scientists on the problem of social inequality.

Thus, D. Locke, I. Bentham, J.-J. Russo and G.V.F. Hegel also paid attention to the issues of social inequality in their philosophical theories. They all recognized that issues of social inequality are serious problem for the state.

A. Saint-Simon was the first to see and comprehend the basis of society in industrial production(industry). He was able not only to understand, but also to justify the role economic activity forms of ownership in the formation of classes. He first introduced the terms "industrialization", "industrial (industrial) society". The merit of A. Saint-Simon is that he will be able to lay in sociology that "paradigm of production", which the famous thinkers O. Comte, and K. Marx, and M. Weber were able to continue in their teachings.

Auguste Comte was the first to investigate the problems of inequality in society. He developed theoretical and methodological ideas for structuring society. It was O. Comte's famous work "The System of Positive Politics" that outlined the main aspects of this problem.

So, social education presuppose cooperation, which is based on the division of labor. It is, according to O. Comte, a fundamental social fact. The division of labor is "the most important condition of our social life."

O. Comte asserts the natural, eternal and irreducible nature of the built social hierarchy. This is the very unnatural character of the idea of ​​social equality. The process of dividing society into classes follows from the division of managerial and executive functions. The Thinker defines all classes differently, but they have two most common unequal categories:

· Leaders;

· Performers.

O. Comte examined the society of his time and singled out two of the most significant categories in them: patriciate and proletariat. In each of them, the thinker united smaller social groups. For example, bankers, wealth managers and entrepreneurs are patricians. Entrepreneurs are also divided into several groups: industrial and agricultural.

A. Comte distinguishes classes based on the criteria of power, property and prestige. Political power must be in the hands of the people who manage the industry. It is the capitalists who have all the necessary funds, which means that political power should belong to them. Although O. Comte assumes the possibility of unethical actions on the part of the secular power, he still hopes for the existence of spiritual power, even in conditions of enmity with the secular.

O. Comte puts forward the hypothesis of the disappearance of the middle classes, since he does not find a place for the middle class in society, which should be built on "positive" philosophy and sociology. He assumes that the "best" small proprietors must join the capitalist class, while the rest must join the ranks of the proletarian class. Only in this way will the society consist only of the rich and the poor, where the duties of the rich will only be entrusted with the opportunity to improve the lot of the poor.

The emergence of such a direction in sociology, which studies social inequality is closely associated with a scientist named K. Marx. It was he who deeply substantiated the class structure of society. The scientist is the classic representative of the theory of class analysis. It is in social inequality that Karl Marx sees the causes of the class conflict.

For K. Marx and his followers, classes are social communities, and the evoked form of manifestation of the conflict is the class struggle. This conflict, which arises between classes, arose from the formation of antagonistic contradictions, which are firmly entrenched in the political and economic system.

In the well-known today works of K. Marx, "The class struggle in France from 1848 to 1850", "Manifesto The communist party"," Capital "and others, he analyzed the structure of capitalist society. He was able to identify the conditions that are required for the formation of classes.

Thus, the basic concept of class points to previously rethought economic inequality. It is precisely this that is the objective and only factor in the structure of society. Therefore, class affiliation is determined by objective conditions, and not by the previously accepted ideas of people about the adopted social position.

It was Karl Marx who filled the concept of "class" with a clear economic content. So, the main classes, according to the scientist, are capitalists and wage workers. It is between these groups that initially there is a conflict, and all because they have completely different economic and political interests. The theory put forward predisposes to the fact that society is viewed as a whole as a constant conflict.

K. Marx, in his work "The Manifesto of the Communist Party", creates a theory of the historical process. This assumption is based on the class struggle, which will be the impetus for all possible transformations. K. Marx noted that everything new that he suggested consisted only in the proof of the following factors:

1. The existence of classes is associated with the historical phases of the development of production.

2. The class struggle inevitably leads the state to the dictatorship of the proletariat.

3. Dictatorship is the transition to the destruction of all classes and to a society without class inequality.

To date, in studies of social inequality in the structure of society, special attention is paid to the stratification approach. At the same time, the greatest development of social inequality, and the stratification approach was received by the idea of ​​M. Weber and the multidimensional approach of P. Sorokin and P. Bourdieu.

Sociologist P. Sorokin explained the inevitability of social inequality by the internal biopsychic processes of people, the environment, the unequal position, and the collectivity of the life of individuals. All this requires the organization of relations and behavior, which leads to the stratification of society into two groups: managers and governed.

conclusions

To this day, the social structure of society is a fragile mechanism, and it cannot be justified due to its constant mobility. It is impossible to substantiate its work only by relying on the class and socio-stratification approach. Such unambiguity would allow presenting only a simplified model of social inequality, and this would in no way correspond to the real state of affairs.

Social inequality is inevitable and necessary condition the existence of society. It manifests itself at all stages of its historical development, and only the forms and degree of social inequality change. If social inequality did not exist, then individuals would not have the desire to engage in complex and labor-intensive activities, to improve their qualifications. With the help of income inequality, society encourages individuals to the necessary, but difficult professions, using a system of incentives for the more educated and talented for more stimulation.

And they have unequal life chances and opportunities to meet needs.

In the very general view inequality means that people live in conditions in which they have unequal access to limited resources of material and spiritual consumption.

Fulfilling qualitatively unequal working conditions, satisfying social needs to varying degrees, people sometimes find themselves employed in economically heterogeneous work, because such types of labor have different assessment their public utility.

The main mechanisms of social inequality are the relations of property, power (domination and subordination), social (that is, socially secured and hierarchized) division of labor, as well as uncontrolled, spontaneous social differentiation. These mechanisms are predominantly associated with the characteristics market economy, with inevitable competition (including in the labor market) and unemployment. Social inequality is perceived and experienced by many people (primarily the unemployed, economic migrants, those who find themselves at or below the poverty line) as a manifestation of injustice. Social inequality, property stratification of society, as a rule, lead to an increase in social tension, especially during the transition period.

The main principles of social policy are:

1. protection of the standard of living by introducing different forms compensation for price increases and indexation;
2. providing assistance to the poorest families;
3. the issuance of unemployment assistance;
4. ensuring social insurance policy, setting the minimum wage for workers;
5. development of education, health protection, environment mainly at the expense of the state;
6. pursuing an active policy aimed at ensuring qualifications.

Collegiate YouTube

1 / 2

✪ Inequality and social stratification. Social Science Video Tutorial Grade 11

✪ Social studies. Lesson 12. Social inequality. Social stratification. Family and marriage

Subtitles

A liberal perspective on the causes of inequality

Causes of inequality

From the point of view of the theory of conflict, the cause of inequality is the protection of the privileges of power, who controls society and power, he has the opportunity to benefit personally for himself, inequality is the result of the tricks of influential groups seeking to maintain their status. Robert Michels deduced the iron law of oligarchy: oligarchy always develops when the number of organizations exceeds a certain value, because 10 thousand people cannot discuss the issue before each case, they entrust the discussion of the issue to the leaders.

According to experts from the international humanitarian organization Oxfam, the reasons for the growth of social inequality in the world since 2010 are as follows:

• tax evasion by wealthy people by withdrawing funds to offshores,
• reduction of workers' wages,
• an increase in the difference between the minimum and maximum levels of wages.

Changes in the degree of social inequality in the course of history

Vilfredo Pareto believed that the degree of economic inequality, the proportion of wealthy people in the population is a constant thing. Karl Marx believed that in modern world there is a process of economic differentiation - the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer, the middle class is disappearing. Pitirim Alexandrovich Sorokin refuted these hypotheses with facts in hand and proved that the level of economic inequality fluctuates over time around one constant value. Too much increase in the degree of inequality or equality is equally fraught with national catastrophe and upheaval. Too strong an increase in inequality makes a small group of millionaires easy to overthrow or destroy. Experience has shown South America, oligarchic regimes are very unstable. The experience of the policy of war communism in Russia showed that after the 1918 decree, when the difference in incomes was limited to a ratio of 175: 100

Max Weber identified three criteria for inequality:

Using the first criterion, you can measure the degree of inequality by the difference in income. Using the second criterion - the difference in honor and respect. Using the third criterion - by the number of subordinates. Sometimes there is a contradiction between the criteria, for example, a professor and a priest today have a low income, but they enjoy great prestige. The mafia leader is rich, but his prestige in society is minimal. Rich people statistically live longer and get sick less. A person's career is influenced by wealth, race, education, parental occupation, and personal ability to lead people. Higher education makes it easier to move up the career ladder in large companies than small ones.

Inequality figures

The horizontal width of the shape represents the number of people with a given income. At the top of the figure is the elite. Over the past hundred years, Western society has evolved from a pyramidal structure to a diamond structure. The pyramidal structure contains the vast majority of the poor and a small handful of oligarchs. The diamond-shaped structure has a large share of the middle class. The diamond structure is preferable to the pyramidal structure, since a large middle class will not allow a handful of poor people to start a civil war. In the first case, the vast majority of the poor can easily overturn the social system.

Social inequality is a form of social differentiation in which individual individuals, social groups, strata, classes are at different levels of the vertical social hierarchy and have unequal life chances and opportunities to satisfy needs.

Any society is always structured on many grounds - national, social-class, demographic, resettlement, etc. Structuring, that is, people's belonging to certain social, professional, socio-demographic groups, can generate social inequality. Even natural genetic or physical differences between people can form the basis for unequal relationships. But the main thing in society is those differences, those objective factors that give rise to social inequality of people. Inequality is an enduring fact of every society. Ralph Dahrendorf wrote: “Even in a prosperous society, the unequal position of people remains an important and permanent phenomenon ... rough divisions according to the size of property and income, prestige and power, our society is characterized by many rank differences - so subtle and at the same time so deeply rooted that statements about the disappearance of all forms of inequality as a result of equalizing processes can be taken at least skeptically " ...

Social differences are those differences that are generated by social factors: division of labor, way of life, social roles that are performed by individual individuals or social groups.

The essence of social inequality lies in the unequal access of different categories of the population to social goods such as money, power and prestige.

Social inequality problem:

1. The importance of social classes

Belonging to a particular social class influences the behavior and thinking of people to a much greater extent than other aspects of social life, it determines their life chances.

First, in order to survive, representatives of the upper strata of society need to spend a smaller share of available resources than representatives of the lower social classes.

Secondly, representatives of the upper classes have more intangible benefits. Their children are more likely to attend prestigious educational institutions and are more likely to perform better than children of parents of lower social standing.

Third, wealthy people have a higher average active life than poor people.

Fourthly, people with higher incomes experience greater satisfaction from life than people with less income, since belonging to a particular social class affects the lifestyle - the amount and nature of consumption of goods and services. In summary, we can say that social class man determines almost all areas of his life.

2. Social inequality.

Inequality and poverty are concepts closely related to social stratification... Inequality characterizes the uneven distribution of scarce resources of society - money, power, education, and prestige - between different strata, or strata of the population. The main measure of inequality is the amount of liquid assets. This function is usually performed by money. If inequality is presented in the form of a scale, then on one pole there will be those who own the greatest (rich), and on the other - the least (poor) amount of goods. Thus, poverty is the economic and socio-cultural condition of people who have a minimum amount of liquid values ​​and limited access to social benefits.

If inequality characterizes society as a whole, then poverty affects only part of the population. Depending on how high the level of economic development of the country, poverty covers a significant or insignificant part of the population. Sociologists refer to the proportion of a country's population (usually expressed as a percentage) living near the official poverty line, or threshold, by the scale of poverty.

Below the poor in the social hierarchy are the poor and the disadvantaged. In Russia, the poor were the poor, the poor and the exploited peasants. Extreme poverty was called poverty. A beggar was considered a person who lived by alms, collecting alms. But not everyone living in absolute poverty should be called beggars. The poor live either on earnings or on pensions and benefits, but they do not beg. It is more correct to refer to the poor as the category of those living in poverty who earn their living by begging on a regular basis.

Solutions to social inequality

social inequality society class

The main ways of conducting social policy are:

• 1.protection of the standard of living by introducing various forms of compensation in the event of price increases and carrying out indexation;
• 2. providing assistance to the poorest families;
• 3. issue of assistance in case of unemployment;
• 4.providing social insurance policy, establishing a minimum wages for workers;
• 5. development of education, protection of health, the environment, mainly at the expense of the state;
• 6. pursuing an active policy aimed at ensuring qualifications.